I do not show the output for this particular model because it should be similar to the one that I showed you just before when we had the dependent variable as being job performance. That's the same way that you should look at the output. Look for an interaction term. If that's significant, you'll start having initial support for your overall condition of interact model. Now, let's run model number 8, on PROCESS that macro developed by Hayes. So now it is different. You needed to select number 8. Your model is model number 8 and you have job performance as your independent variable meaningfulness as your independent variable, engagement as your mediator. And you'll need it to select and enter an organization identification as your proposed moderator w. It's important to enter this variable in the w moderator not in the z, or v, or q because model number eight requires your moderator to be moderator w. Here again, yes, we keep it constant, because we are adding an interaction term. So we needed to mean center the variables and now you just double check that you have your moderators on both mediator and dependent variable. We do not have controls or conference in this model, but if you have some in your own data set, it's important to partial out those variants from the mediator and from the dependent variable as well. Now click on OK and you'll have the output file. The first thing that we do every single time that we run a model on process is double check the model number. So here is model number eight, which is good. We are probably getting the results that we want. At least we are conducting the analysis using the model that we need, so now let's walk through all these coefficients. First, the first thing that we look at, is the relationship between the interaction term and our job engagement. We do find here, that there is a significant relationship between this interaction term and engagement. This is last and 0.05. The second thing that we look. So this is the first, and that this is the second. The second thing that we look at is the relationship between our mediator and our dependent variable. So in this case, job engagement has a significant relationship with our dependent variable, job performance. Again, p is less than 0.05. In model number eight, we are controlling forwarding direction term on the dependent variable and this is our interaction to here and we see that the effects of the interaction term meaningfulness and organization identification on performance is not significant. P is more, is not less than 0.05. You can see here, that the interaction term is meaningfulness and organization identification. Similar to here, job meaningfulness times organization identification, that's interaction term, or interaction number one. We are just labeling them differently because they are part of a different analysis in our model and now the next step is to look at the bootstrapping analysis. And we look at the mediator here and we do find that the relationship of job meaningfulness on job performance via job engagement is significant for individuals high in organizational identification, okay. So and the reason that we know that this relationship is significant is because there is no zero in the confidence interval of our bootstrap analysis but we also see that for the relationship between job meaningfulness and job performance via job engagement. For individuals low on organization identification, that relationship is not significant, because there is zero in the confidence interval of our bootstrap analysis, okay? So we do find support for our conditional indirect effect model here and finally we look at the index of moderated mediation that was recently actually added to the process macro by Hayes. And again, there is a whole paper about what this coefficient, what this index is. You can download this paper by going to the description of this video and we do find it, that the bootstrapping analysis for this index does not have zero. The confidence interval for that particular test does not have zero. More indication that we do have a conditional indirective fact, a significant conditional indirective fact. So in this session we conducted an analysis and walk it through all the steps of getting this model running. So we could find, in this particular case, that we do have a significant condition or indirect effect of job meaningfulness and job performance via our mediator, job engagement. And that indirect fact changes as a a function of the organization identification level of our employees.
